Lots more info needed from the OP. Private land?- public land? - NPS? NFS? BLM? State Park? "Laws"? - Federal? State? local? "Pirate"? = no permit? No fee paid? Not Certified? You sound as though you have a not-so-hidden agenda.

In my area there is someone guiding on rock who does not have the skill sets or knowledge to be guiding. I say this having seen him climbing at the local crags before i knew he was guiding.

He's not just guiding under the table either. He has a web site and is promoting himself as a full fledged company. I might not have an issue if it was just cash and word of mouth/referrals.

It's the same thing in RMNP. I assume in quite a few other parks, too.

It's the same in all US National Parks and National Monuments, since there is single governing body - the National Park Service.

Guide services are viewed identically to any other concessionaire, such as lodging and food service. The idea was that the concessionaire would build the necessary structures and infrastructure and handle all the management. In return for investing that much capital, they would receive an exclusive contract for some period (best measured in decades) of time. Whether this is a realistic model for things like guiding services is still open for debate.

It's the same thing in RMNP. I assume in quite a few other parks, too.

It's the same in all US National Parks and National Monuments, since there is single governing body - the National Park Service.

Guide services are viewed identically to any other concessionaire, such as lodging and food service. The idea was that the concessionaire would build the necessary structures and infrastructure and handle all the management. In return for investing that much capital, they would receive an exclusive contract for some period (best measured in decades) of time. Whether this is a realistic model for things like guiding services is still open for debate.

Sure, I agree that if a land use tax exists, everyone should pay it. But creating a guiding monopoly is the most idiotic possible solution to solving that issue. It is entirely possible for the NPS to say that any company can guide in Yosemite, and every company has to pay a land use tax. But they dont do that. Instead they say that only DNC can control the public-use assets in Yosemite. How that is even legal is beyond me. I am rather surprised no one has sued the NPS over that yet.

Its legal, even if it isn't fair, because the NPS offered a contract for bid, and the winning company or companies had the best bid. What "the best bid" means is ambiguous, I don't know, but you are welcome to petition the NPS to break those contracts (which they won't) or change the way they do business when those contracts come up for renewal (which they might).

I agree, I don't like the monopoly that gets created, but I also don't think that any existing standard will force guides in the US to be competent. I've known a lot of AMGA, NOLS, and OB folks with absolute shit for brains, and the NPS would likely liaise with one of them to generate a standard.

For what its worth, the limited number of guiding operations on El Capitan basically prevents the need for a Grand-Canyon-Style lottery to get on it, which would result in *only* guided trips having any chance of actually occurring.

For what its worth, the limited number of guiding operations on El Capitan basically prevents the need for a Grand-Canyon-Style lottery to get on it, which would result in *only* guided trips having any chance of actually occurring.

Same for the canyoneering permits in Zion. For any given day, 50% are allocated to reservations done through a lottery system and the other 50% are for walk-ups. Realistically, the guide services snatch up over 90% of the reserved permits, and each day they send several representatives to the walk-up window. This works out to the guide services obtaining on average 75% of the available permits on most days. Add to this the limits the park imposes on certain canyons (eg: there are only 50 available permits for The Subway each day) and the result is that damned few non-guided individuals obtain permits.

Imagine something similar for The Nose or other insanely popular wall routes.

I thought there was no guiding in Zion. Has this changed? Sure - most people go with a friend that acts as a guide, but it did not seem like professional guides were leading people on the canyons I was in last year.

The idea is 1) to Stop over use, Numbers restriction, and the environmental impact of that 2) Companies must have a plan For lessening environmental impact 3) companies must have an appropriate safety plan- Often including that guides are qualified. 4) If a company worked in their own property or privately owned there would be a charge for it's use so it is only fair that those on public land do so. 5) companies are tracable and therefore Held responsible for Damage, Behaviour. Dont want random convenience Bolts everywhere or litter left, or new trails etc.

I thought there was no guiding in Zion. Has this changed? Sure - most people go with a friend that acts as a guide, but it did not seem like professional guides were leading people on the canyons I was in last year.

Most definitely. The do not operate as a concessionaire like Yosemite Mountain School, but they do operate in the park, but as "private groups". Technically, guided canyoneering is not permitted in the park, but the services have found a legal loop hole to exploit. Sure, all their web sites will say they go into canyons outside the park, but I've encountered more than one guided party in Mystery Canyon and even The Narrows. Pirate guiding at its best!

The idea is 1) to Stop over use, Numbers restriction, and the environmental impact of that 2) Companies must have a plan For lessening environmental impact 3) companies must have an appropriate safety plan- Often including that guides are qualified. 4) If a company worked in their own property or privately owned there would be a charge for it's use so it is only fair that those on public land do so. 5) companies are tracable and therefore Held responsible for Damage, Behaviour. Dont want random convenience Bolts everywhere or litter left, or new trails etc.

KP, all of these are good points, but even with more than one guide service operating in one park, those standards could be maintained. Maybe even better than now as guide companies want to show how much they want to keep the contract.

Not sure if it still is, but when I was living in Yosemite, the Yosemite Mountaineering school didn't bid on the contract, they are park of the concession. (Curry Company at the time, and what ever they are now) The concession gets all business. No guide service can afford to outbid those guys. They own baseball stadiums.

I also believe places like Yosemite and other National parks would have better infrastructure, maintenance, environmental protection, and the such if each business was operated by separate businesses. Each would compete against each other to show they are protecting the park better than the other.

happiegirl do you read and or edit anything before you post rambling disjointed replies? just curious. I agree with US Navy. The current system ensures poor and lower economic class folks cannot afford guides and limits choice.